Does the Uprising in Egypt Open the Floodgates for Other Countries in the Middle East?

President Hosni Mubarak is clinging on to power in Egypt by his fingernails. But this is clearly only a temporary situation, and an attempt for him to retain some element of dignity. His political career has been brought to an abrupt end and, with it, any aspirations that his son Gamal may have had to succeed him. The rule of this modern-day Pharaoh and his family is finally over.

Mubarak's rule over Egypt for the past thirty years has been difficult to characterise. He assumed power from the assassinated Anwar Sadat soon after Egypt was practically excommunicated from the Arab world for signing a peace treaty with Israel. Mubarak had the job of stabilising Egypt after the murder of its president, while also seeking out friends to use as a leg for its foreign policy. He has maintained cordial relations with Israel which have served to preserve the peace agreement between the countries. He has engaged with the USA and other western countries which has ensured that Egypt has had trading partners, has been at the centre of peace negotiations and has been the recipient of generous military aid packages. Internally, Mubarak has chosen to rule Egypt under the constant threat of the provisions of the state of emergency, and while ensuring that all opposition to his rule has been firmly stamped out. This has brought benefits to Israel and other western countries because he has been sure to crush the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which presents a real threat along with Al-Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist organisations.

It is my assessment that the people of Egypt have enjoyed a fairly good existence during Mubarak's rule. As long as they were prepared to toe the line and support the regime, they could have enjoyed a fairly acceptable lifestyle and standard of living. Egypt has enjoyed economic success via its policy of engaging the west. It has been the destination for millions of western tourists with the economic benefits that tourist industry brings. It has established itself as a telecommunications crossing point with many telecommunication cable systems crossing Egypt undersea and overland in a link between Europe and the Far East. The western military aid packages have served to boost the Egyptian army and, with it, the military support for Mubarak's regime. For the average Egyptian, however, it seems that even this has not been enough. Mubarak's unwillingness to provide a political environment allowing Egyptians the freedom to determine their own political destiny has directly contributed to the current uprising. It is noticeable how the demonstrations in Egypt have been spontaneous expressions of frustration by people on the street, and not driven by political opponents. Ironically, the political opposition was extremely ill-prepared for this uprising, and has been unable to capitalise upon it. The Muslim Brotherhood have been virtually invisible throughout the past two weeks of protests, and opposition figure Mohammed El-Baradei was forced to hurry back to Egypt having been away from the country when the protests began.

It is clear that the prospects of political stability and economic prosperity that may have satisfied citizens of Middle Eastern countries in the past, are no longer enough to keep their rulers in power. Engagement of the west has proved to be a double-edged sword. In exchange for the economic benefits that the west has provided, Middle Eastern rulers should have been prepared for the export of democratic ideas and principles to their citizens. Even those countries which have not engaged the west to the same extent are finding that the new Internet age has facilitated the globalisation of democracy. It is for this reason that I suggest that the uprising in Egypt is just the start of similar uprisings in other countries and across the region.

We have already seen the overthrow of the Tunisian government. Protests have been held on the streets of Sana'a in Yemen and Amman in Jordan. Syrian President Bashar El-Assad is clearly thinking about the implications for his country as he has announced that he does not believe that this uprising will reach the streets of Damascus. I think that this is more wishful thinking than firm belief. Syria is clearly a candidate country for a similar uprising in protest against Assad's autocratic rule. The Iranian government is bracing itself for possible protests in Tehran. We may recall that Mir Hossein Mousavi fairly won the previous election, but was denied the office by Ahmadinejad and his thugs. He is now regrouping the opposition parties, and they seem ready to use the current climate to renew their own attempts to assert democracy. It is difficult to rule out possible protests in the Gulf countries and in Saudi Arabia where the monarchs' rule has been absolute. Substantial economic prosperity in these countries arising from oil revenues cannot entirely rule out the possibility of an uprising against their autocratic political regimes.

Indications are that 2011 will represent a major turning point in the Middle Eastern political landscape. Rulers were once able to isolate their citizens from developments elsewhere in the world to secure their own political situation. The Internet and other globalisation tools have changed all of that. People are now able to identify what they are missing out on, and are no longer happy to accept this fact. Those who maintain that western democracy cannot simply be transplanted into all environments, especially those in the Middle East, may well be correct. It is true that many Middle Eastern countries may not be able to successfully apply these principles to their own environments. But now, it is too late for such contentions. The wheel is turning, and its momentum seems unstoppable.

Violence Sweeps the Arab World

The winds of change seem to be blowing through the Middle East. Demonstrations which began in Tunisia during December have now reached Yemen and Egypt, the Middle East's most populous country. Whereas many of these countries have previously seen demonstrations, this time the unrest is different. Demonstrations in the past have usually been directed against western countries and non-Muslims. The current outbreak is directed against the leaders and governments of Arab countries. When considering the stability of the Middle East and particularly from Israel's perspective, the fact that the unrest has reached Egypt represents a substantial risk.

Most Arab countries have been governed in a distinctly undemocratic way. Even those that have held elections, have given only token representation to democratic principles. Egypt has previously held elections in which Mubarak was the only candidate. This seems to be the limit of democracy across the Arab world. Many Arab countries are ruled by royal dynasties such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Emirates, or by family succession such as Syria and Mubarak's attempts to introduce his son to succeed his rule. It is not unusual for rulers in the Arab world to be around for lengthy periods of time. The thirty years that Mubarak's rule in Egypt has lasted is not an unusual occurrence in this part of the world. There are numerous other examples of leaders outstaying their welcome in the interests of clinging to power.

The unrest over the past couple of months has come unexpectedly, and it is unusual in that it has succeeded in ousting at least one leader from power so far. Events in Egypt indicate that President Hosni Mubarak may well be the next casualty. It would have been almost impossible to predict these events 12 months ago, or even 6 months ago. Traditionally, Arab leaders rule their countries in an autocratic type of way, and tolerate absolutely no opposition or threat to their authority. Despite this fact, the demonstrations in Tunisia which overthrew the rule of President Zine El Abiden Ben Ali, seem to have emboldened opposition movements in Yemen and Egypt. Under these circumstances, it is likely that these demonstrations may spread to other countries and it is difficult to know where this will end.

It is evident that the citizens of these Arab countries have had enough of their political aspirations being suppressed. Until now, they have been afraid to express their opposition to the ruling government. Having witnessed the success achieved in Tunisia, however, opposition movements have gained confidence in their ability to make their views known. The success achieved in Egypt will give even further momentum to those in other countries who wish to oppose their ruling governments. Until today, I would not have dared to bet against Mubarak surviving this attack on his regime. At the current moment, with Omar Suleiman installed as Egypt's first vice president in 3o years, Mubarak's hold on power is looking extremely shaky.

From an Israeli perspective, Mubarak's rule has proved to be good. He has cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood movement which presented as much of a threat to Israel's safety as it did to the Mubarak regime. He has also placed a fairly tight control on the Gaza border which has made it more difficult for Hamas to smuggle arms into the Gaza Strip, which are then used to threaten Israel. If Egypt descends into a state uncertainty as a result of Mubarak being ousted from power, it is expected that Israel will not be immediately threatened. After all, the focus of all the parties is currently on internal political issues. In due course, however, Mubarak's successor will need to get down to the issue of foreign policy and, in particular, policy to be followed regarding Israel and the Hamas state of Gaza. No matter who replaces Mubarak, it is almost certain that Israel will be much more nervous about security on its Egyptian border, and on the border with Gaza.

Even if Mubarak survives the next few days and weeks, it is most likely that he will no longer be in power by the end of 2011. Indications are that the winds of change blowing through the Middle East will see that 2011 is a year of dramatic changes in the Arab world. For Israel, this brings a period of uncertainty and an element of nervousness. Even though Israel is always on heightened alert, the past 30 years have allowed her to be less concerned about events on the Egyptian border. This may be about to change.